Archbold, OH

Duplexes, Triplexes Not Considered To Be Multiple-Family Dwellings

There were several errors in an Archbold Buckeye article last week concerning a proposed zoning change on the south side of the village.

Landon and Rachel Wyse, 405 Short-Buehrer Road, asked the Archbold Planning Commission to recommend a change in zoning for 15 properties along Short-Buehrer Road from R-2, low-density residential, to R-1, very low density residential.

Planning Commission members heard the request at a Monday, Sept. 16 hearing.

Owners of 14 of the 15 properties agreed to sign a petition supporting the change.

The request was designed to stop a possible development of as many as 10 housing units on a two-acre parcel of land on Short-Buehrer Road.

Gary and Nancy Grieser own the two-acre parcel. The couple live in a home they built on the property.

How Many Is “Multi?”

Archbold’s zoning code defines a “multiple-family dwelling” as more than three living units in one building.

Duplexes, two living units in one building, and triplexes, three living units in a single building, are not considered “multiple-family” in the village zoning code.

Duplexes and triplexes are sometimes referred to as zero-lot-line homes.

Dennis Howell, village administrator, said in an area zoned R-2, duplexes and triplexes are allowed as long as they meet all the zoning requirements such as front-, back-, and side-yard setbacks and size requirements.

A conditional use permit is not required.

A “multiple family dwelling” is considered a conditional use in an area zoned R-2.

The developer must go before the Planning Commission and be granted conditional use for multiplefamily homes on R-2 property.

In areas zoned R-1, duplexes, triplexes, and multiple family buildings are prohibited. A conditional use permit is not an available option.

Changing the zoning of the Grieser property would effectively ban anything other than single-family homes.

No Plan

Village officials were shown a concept drawing depicting four duplexes, their single-family home, and a second single-family home on the property.

The concept drawing did not show any dimensions for frontage, or the length of a property touching a street.

Howell said the Griesers could build a public street on the property, giving each property the necessary frontage.

Another option would be to build a private street, maintained by a formally organized property association.

Either option would require approval of the Planning Commission.

But the Griesers have not submitted any applications, either for a public or private street.

Howell said the Griesers have not shown the village any detailed plans, only the concept drawing.

Also, Doug Rupp, APC member, was incorrectly identified as Brad Rupp in the original article about the issue.–David Pugh

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *